It's the Beginning of Polycarp Week!

The first words of our Catholic tradition do not appear in the gospel. They were not said by Jesus, nor did they come from the original disciples who originally beheld his glory. They came as a response to a little question from the real founder of Christianity when according to the legend he asked our Polycarp, “Do you recognize me?” As Polycarp drew air into his lungs and opened his mouth, his response set in motion our new faith – “I recognize you as the firstborn of Satan.” Even the tallest oak trees grow from the tiniest of acorns. So it is that our Church emerged from this seemingly insignificant request posed by an otherwise forgotten heretic named ‘Marcion’ to the very father of our Catholic Christian tradition. For most scholars the exchange is something of a theological Trivial Pursuit question. It is stored in rote memory but never fully appreciated. When we sit down and look at it again under a microscope I argue that it offers us a unique window into the what should be seen as the end of a previous form of Christianity and the beginning of all that is familiar in our religion.

The encounter is said to have occurred during Polycarp’s famous trip to Rome. His journey from Asia Minor to the heart of the Empire is generally though to have occurred in the middle of the reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, the adopted son of Hadrian. The man who is asking him the question - according to my understanding - represents the original orthodoxy of Christianity; Polycarp subsequent refusal to acknowledge Marcion any more becomes the very “gold standard” of the new Catholic Church. To prove oneself to be ‘against Marcion’ became the initiation for almost every rising star in Polycarp’s new organization for years to come. There are literally half a dozen works with this title written in the first couple of generations after this initial rebuff. To rape and abuse the old tradition was a kind of initiation ritual which demonstrated that you were made of the ‘right stuff’ for a management position.

While most scholars go along with the idea that Marcion was somehow ‘a bad guy’ because Irenaeus tells us that Polycarp didn’t like him. The few honest souls among us simply have to admit we know too little about this man to make a fair judgment about him. Indeed as is often the case in the world, sometimes it pays to look at the background of the accuser instead of immediately taking all his charges at face value.

Polycarp’s whole trip to Rome seems to have been entirely confrontational. He is known to have also met two other prominent figures in the contemporary Church. According to its official propaganda he is said to have ‘agreed to disagree’ with Anicetus a leading figure in the Roman community about important doctrinal matters. This in itself is remarkable because the Catholics always have a tendency to make everything seem perfectly serene unless otherwise forced to ‘downplay controversy.’

A parallel example happened in apostolic times. We all know who ‘Paul’ and ‘Peter’ are supposed to be. They too had a ‘disagreement’ which at least according to the Catholic version of the story which ultimately became resolved. Interestingly the followers of Marcion, the very man Polycarp is said to have rejected at this same Roman visit, held an early tradition where their apostle and Peter never ‘kissed and made up.’ The good apostle condemned the bad one to eternal damnation.

So it was that if we dig deep enough behind every ‘happy ending’ in the Church, every rumor swept under the carpet we are bound to find another version of the truth which I believe is closer to the truth.

Nevertheless we can say with greater clarity that Polycarp’s visit to Rome was not a vacation. He didn’t go there to shop or pick something up for the missus. He was engaged in very important business - indeed nothing less than the reshaping of the Christian identity. All of which makes this original encounter between Marcion and Polycarp, senior and junior members of the Church at that time all the more interesting.

As it stands their meeting is preserved in only the tersest of descriptions by Irenaeus who writes that Marcion asked Polycarp "Do you recognize me?” to which Polycarp answers "I do recognize you [as] the first-born of Satan." This brevity of the report raises many unanswered questions. Polycarp’s response for instance at first glance seems to mean simply that Marcion was simply a ‘snake’ or perhaps had the very role of the serpent in the Garden of Eden – i.e. to ‘tempt’ the innocent from the true tradition of the Church.

If the reader is at least open to the possibility of the original discussion took place in Aramaic (and there are a number of reasons which suggest it) something else stands out about the aforementioned request from the heretic. The question ‘do you recognize me?’ undoubtedly employed the Aramaic verb nakar – viz. ‘to recognize,’ ‘to know.’ It is used in the writings of Moses to specifically denote the ‘recognition’ of the future king of Israel.

What kind of recognition was 'Marcion' asking Polycarp for? Perhaps the answer lies in recognizing that Lucian of Samosata has Polycarp emerge from Alexandria BEFORE his visit to Rome (the identification of Polycarp with Lucian's itinerant Christian prophet - the Stranger - will be represented here shortly). Could Irenaeus' report about Polycarp rejecting 'Marcion' have something to do with the existence of an Alexandrian Patriarch named 'Marcian' living at the exact time of Polycarp's visit to Rome? Despite the inexactness of the list it is worth noting that someone named 'Marcian' ('belonging to Mark' or Marcus (Eusebius iv.11.6) was head of the tradition of St. Mark:

1) Mark the Evangelist (43–68) (البابا مرقس الأول (مارمرقس الرسول
2) Anianus (68–82) (البابا أنيانوس)
3) Avilius (83–95) (البابا ميليوس)
4) Kedron (96–106) (البابا كردونس)
5) Primus (106–118) (البابا بريموس)
6) Justus (118–135) (البابا يسطس)
7) Eumenes (135–141) (البابا أومانيوس)
8) Markianos (142–152) (البابا مرقيانوس)

That this figure 'Marcian' or Marcus was head of the Alexandrian tradition at this time is EXPLICITLY confirmed by Eusebius who writes "But Hyginus having died at the close of the fourth year of his episcopate, Pius succeeded him in the government of the church of Rome. In Alexandria Marcus was appointed pastor, after Eumenes had filled the office thirteen years in all. And Marcus having died after holding office ten years was succeeded by Celadion in the government of the church of Alexandria."

I mention this only as a promise of ‘things to come’ if we get out from under the historical influence of Polycarp’s tradition. For the moment we should a little more color to the encounter by saying that Marcion was certainly the older of the two men standing there that day. How then did a younger man like Polycarp feel he had the authority to reject an ‘elder’? This is precisely why it is so important for us to take seriously what happened at this strange Roman encounter. We open the door to the EXACT context not only for the birth of the Catholic Church but for the proper understanding of the historical context witnessed by the Letter to Theodore.

The underlying issue is clearly - Polycarp's historical rejection of the authority of Mark or if you will 'those of Mark' (viz. Aramaic Marqiyone) in Alexandria. There can be no other answer.